Staff seeks to set the record straight

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Send email to this addressEnter Your NameAdd a comment hereVerification

It is the ambition of most news publications to distribute fair, objective articles that inform the community in an accurate manner. To say that these values do not apply to The University News would undermine our role as the Fourth Estate on campus. It is never our intention to criticize a person, organization or policy without reason.

In last week’s issue of The University News, it was incorrectly reported that students were not consulted in the event planning processes for Chartered Student Organizations and that there were additional policies put in place for the Cross Cultural Center. While the claims our publication made about the confusion can be attributed, the article failed to address that the administration did in fact make efforts to communicate with students about the changes.

The confusion grew and ultimately reached the staff of The University News by word of mouth, and instead of diminishing the uncertainty, our publication added to it. We reported on the confusion, but failed to address the root of it. In doing so, the voice of the administration was compromised. As a result of our publication, even more confusion between administrators and students emerged, having an inverse effect on our primary concern of informing the University community.

Although this publication is a voice of students, we must remember not to neglect the voice of our administrators that make student life on campus possible. The Performance, Presentation and Speaker Program Policy was decided between administrators and SGA’s policy review committee under the Harriss administration in April 2010, according to Assistant Vice President and Dean of Students Scott Smith. The policy changes applied not only to the CCC, as previously reported, but to all CSOs.

The previous article and the editorial from the editorial board based its statements on misinformation and one-sided arguments without properly allowing administrators to abate our ignorance.

We intend to continue to publish accurate and balanced articles in the future, citing last week’s oversight as an example of improper reporting.

We ask that our readers understand that errors such as these happen and it is our job to set the record straight. As a student publication, we are learning to be professionals in the field of journalism.

Mistakes such as these offer us an opportunity to address our weaknesses and improve our skills when gathering and disseminating information.